On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 07:49:47PM +0100, nusenu wrote: > gus: > > On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 11:26:07PM +0100, nusenu wrote: > > > I've got some practical experience with how things are (not) handled > > > by the Tor Project in this space which discourages involvement. > > > The past has also shown that proposals in this area are not > > > handled as tor proposals in the sense of [1]. > > > > I believe some proposals about relay operators were not handled as > > people had different opinions about the Tor Community governance and its > > process. > > I actually had something else in mind (see geko's reply) but > if you say that people had no clear understanding or different opinions about > community governance than it might also be a good time to start clarifying it. > > The point "clarify and describe the different involved roles" as mentioned on Saturday's relay meetup > is a good start in this specific context and I agree that it will be useful. > > > > > We're not in the process of approving any of them. > > > > > > a few questions: > > > > > > - Can you describe the process these proposals will undergo after they got collected? > > > - Who "approves" / rejects them? > > > - Will it be a public and transparent process? > > > - Who will be involved in the process? > > > - How are relay operators included and to what extend? > > > > > > - Will "approved" proposals be enforced? > > > - How will they get enforced? New tor release or directory authority vote? > > > - Will directory authorities be formally required to enforce "approved" proposals? > > > > Great questions. > > > > - Yes, it will be a public and transparent process; > > When geko highlighted the sponsor in the meeting something along the lines of > "sitting down with our sponsor and defining criterias" (if you haven't been at the meeting don't take this too serious) > it made me wonder: If this is a public and transparent process, who is financing this work? (dubbed S112) > If you're not familiar with project management practices at the Tor Project, it's important to note that Sponsor+code is simply a numerical code assigned by the operations/grants team to a particular funded project. It is not a cypherpunk "scramble box" as some may mistakenly assume. The sponsor name, DRL (Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor - US Gov), can be found in the linked milestone that was previously shared, during the meetup, and is also publicly listed in our GitLab instance. Milestone: https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/-/milestones/44#tab-issues S112 activity tracked with the label "S112" in our GitLab: https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/-/issues/?sort=created_date&state=opened&label_name%5B%5D=Sponsor%20112&first_page_size=100 You can find all the current Tor Project sponsors, projects and reports here: - Project wiki page: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/team/-/wikis/sponsors-2023 - Current Sponsors: https://www.torproject.org/about/sponsors/ - Fiscal year reports: https://www.torproject.org/about/reports/ For those interested on learning more about S112 work, the Network Health team meet every Monday at 16 UTC, on #tor-meeting (irc.oftc.net), and we've been adding the relevant topics on the relay operator meetup agenda. > > Our goal is to build this governance process. > > Do you have a timeline for building and defining the governance process > which probably should be the first thing to do > so people can make up their minds on whether they like > the process and want to be involved or not? > Sure, here is the timeline: October 2022 - January 2024 - We called for proposals from the community (March 3 2023) - Work on proposals (TPO) (like meta proposal about the process and governance and different stake holders) (March/April) - Proposal evaluation (May/July) - Events and offline discussions with community (August/September) - Approving proposals after feedback from the community and figuring out the details of enforcement/adhering to them (September-December) - Proposals go live (January 2024) > > > > adopted by a meaningful fraction of the Tor community (e.g. > > > > providing valid contact information). > > > > > > Can you elaborate on how you define "valid" in this context? > > > > From the Expectations for relay operators: > > > > "Be sure to set your ContactInfo to a working email address in case we > > need to reach you." > > Since that document says nothing about verifying that string > "hopefully valid" is in my opinion a more accurate description for it > than "valid", no? > > kind regards, > nusenu hm, for the scope of that document (Expectation for relay operators), I don't think we need to describe a verification process of "working email". For other proposals, it could be important to define the process, though. But you can suggest a better phrase here: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/community/relays/-/issues/18 Gus -- The Tor Project Community Team Lead
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays